Sunday, June 1, 2014

“The NFL can no longer ignore this and perpetuate the use of this name
as anything but what it is: a racial slur,” the letter says. “We urge
the NFL to formally support a name change for the Washington football
team. . . . We urge you and the National Football League to send the
same clear message as the NBA did: that racism and bigotry have no place
in professional sports.”

''Our use of `Redskins' as the name of our football team for more than
80 years has always been respectful of and shown reverence toward the
proud legacy and traditions of Native Americans,'' he wrote.
The letter references research that ''the term Redskins originated as a
Native American expression of solidarity.'' It notes that the team's
logo was designed by Native American leaders and cites surveys that
Native Americans and Americans as a whole support the name.

“Washington Redskins owner Dan Snyder said Tuesday it's time for people
to "focus on reality" concerning Native American matters instead of
criticizing the team's nickname. "We understand the issues out there,
and we're not an issue," Snyder said. "The real issues are real-life
issues, real-life needs, and I think it's time that people focus on
reality."

The National Congress of American Indians and the Oneida Indian Nation
sent letters Wednesday to more than 2,700 players, asking them to speak
out against a name that “does not honor people of color, instead it
seeks to conceal a horrible segment of American history and the
countless atrocities suffered by Native Americans.”

They also sent the letter to the Twitter accounts of the players, with the hashtag #rightsideofhistory.

“Because
you are in the NFL, you command a level of respect and credibility when
speaking out about the league’s behavior,” the letter said. “Indeed,
players are the most publicly identifiable representatives of the
league, which means your support is critical to ending this injustice.”

Luntz brought Reid’s opposition to the name up without prompt from
host John Ralston during a larger conversation about civility in
politics.
“He’s spending his time trying to get the Washington Redskins, which,
the last time I checked my map, is 2,000 miles away from Nevada, and he
wants to change the Redskins’ name. And he hasn’t done, if you use my
language, crap for veterans on Memorial Day,” Luntz said, referring to the current scandal around the Veterans Administration.
When Ralston suggested that Reid and the Senate could multi-task, Luntz kept going.
“Every veteran who’s watching right now ought to be furious with him
because he’s spending his time…attacking the name of a football team.
And he hasn’t done squat for these veterans,” Luntz said. “This is part
of the reason that I find it difficult to function in politics, that he
would rather go for the soundbite, that he would rather make this
political gesture to raise money from Native Americans, than to actually
solve a crisis in the Veteran’s Administration.”

The team and NFL have claimed that then-owner George Preston Marshall
picked the current name to honor the team’s Indian coach, William “Lone
Star” Dietz, and some Indian players on the squad.
There’s a lot of controversy over whether Dietz was actually a Native American. Witten’s article doesn’t resolve that.
But it does refute the team’s contention that the name was selected to celebrate Dietz.
The proof is in a July 6, 1933, edition of the Hartford Courant, which Witten unearthed after the sports Web site MMQB tipped him off about it.
The
edition includes a short Associated Press dispatch quoting Marshall
saying: “The fact that we have in our head coach, Lone Star Dietz, an
Indian, together with several Indian players, has not, as may be
suspected, inspired me to select the name Redskins.”
Instead,
Marshall explains, he gave up “Braves” to avoid confusion with a Boston
professional baseball team of the same name. He apparently picked the
Redskins name so he could keep the existing Native American logo.
Witten
also reports that lawyers at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office have
rejected at least 12 applications to register “redskins” as a trademark
since 1993.
The reason: The word disparages Native Americans.

While Sen. Baldwin and other Democrats were out stalking headlines, it was Sen. Ron Johnson's quote that really stood out.

"We have enormous challenges facing
America. Only some of them are the concern of the federal government,”
he said. “The letter, signed primarily by Senate Democrats, concerns an
issue that should be left to the team’s owners, its players, and its
fans. I trust that they will do what is right. This is not a matter that
requires congressional action. Congress should concentrate on its own
duties.”

“And when it comes to football,” he said, “I will concentrate on the Green Bay Packers.”

Boom.

Hey Kevin its Frank Luntz's poster you should have on the wall, he is the one spoon feeding thoughts into the ring czar's head!

We at Cogdis, like to offer solutions and I think we have one that is fitting. Since the Redskins are based in Washington DC, I recommend switching to the Washington Chickenshits. Heck we even have your helmet designed already!

1 comment:

Here's a good reason to change the team's name...it offends people! It doesn't matter whether it should or should not offend; it does offend. Community peace and harmony is important. Choosing a new name and logo could be a great marketing opportunity for the team. Instead they court bad press and bad feelings.